GAAC Degree Program Proposal Form & Instructions
General Instructions:
1. All proposals to create new graduate-level academic programs must be submitted to the Graduate
Academic Affairs Committee (GAAC) for its recommendation to the governing vice president(s). The chart
below details all the stages of approval for academic courses and programs:
Department
Approval
College/School
Approval
GAAC
Approval
CADD Rec
New Degree








New Minor








Board of
Trustees
Approval
VP Approval



HLC Accreditor
Approval

See Below

See Below
HLC Accreditation Approval
Approval from our institutional accrediting agency, the Higher Learning Commission, is necessary for 1) new
programs at degree levels SLU is not currently authorized to offer; 2) all new distance learning programs; 3)
most new and existing programs proposed to be offered offsite in MO and out of state; and 4) all new programs
requiring substantial financial investment or reallocation. Note that the HLC will, in most cases, not consider a
new program proposal until it has been fully approved by all necessary campus parties. Accordingly, when
reviewing the timelines below, please add at least six months to the process when HLC approval is
necessary. Contact SLU’s HLC liaison in the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs for details.
2. To be considered by GAAC, all academic proposals requiring any new financial resources in their first five
years of operation must be submitted according to the timeline detailed below. The timeline ensures that
deliberation of such proposals is coordinated with the University’s academic planning and budget
processes/cycles.
CADD
GAAC
Proposed Start Proposal Submitted
Recommendation
for
Recommendation
for
Term
to GAAC by…
Approval by…
Approval by…
VP
Recommendation for
Approval by…
Board of Trustees
Approval in…
Fall 2015
February 2014
May 2014
June 2014
September 2014
December 2014
Fall 2016
February 2015
May 2015
June 2015
September 2015
December 2015
Proposals NOT requiring any new financial resources in their first five years of operation may submit
proposals according to the following timeline:
GAAC
Proposed Start Proposal Submitted
Recommendation for
Term
to GAAC by…
Approval by…
CADD
VP
Recommendation for
Approval by…
Recommendation for
Approval by…
Board of Trustees
Approval in…
Fall 2015
September 2014
November 2014
November 2014
December 2014
February2015
Fall 2016
September 2015
November 2015
November 2015
December 2015
February2016
Fall 2017
September 2016
November 2016
November 2016
December 2016
February2017
Exceptions to these GAAC submission timelines must be approved in advance by the governing
Vice President for Academic Affairs (VPAA).
1
3. To be considered by GAAC, all academic program proposals must be approved first by the appropriate
academic department and college/school/center via their established policies and procedures. Approval
must include the dean’s commitment to fund the proposed program from existing college/school/center
resources or the dean’s commitment to make the program’s funding request a priority in the next budget
development cycle.
4. All proposals for GAAC consideration must be submitted using an approved proposal form. Before
beginning to fill out the form, you are strongly encouraged to contact the GAAC Chair for assistance
and guidance. She/he can explain particular questions, clarify documentation needs, and provide tips
that will aid in the development of the program proposal.
5. Proposals and all attachments, supporting documents/letters, etc., are to be submitted directly to the
GAAC Chair as a single PDF document. If you need assistance, please contact the GAAC Chair.
2
GAAC Degree Program Proposal
Requesting College(s)/School(s)/Center(s):
Requesting Department(s):
Academic Level:
Post-Baccalaureate (includes all graduate and professional programs)
Associated Degree:
Master of Arts (M.A.)
Master of Science (M.S.)
Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.)
Other – please specify:
Program Title/Area
of Study:
Program Start Term
Examples: English, Biology, Public Health
Fall
Spring
Summer
Other
SLU Approval Authority
Signature
Date
Department Chair
College/School/Center
Curriculum Committee Chair
College/School/Center Dean
Chair, GAAC
Council of Academic Deans
and Directors
Vice President for
Academic Affairs
Chair, Academic Affairs
Committee of the University
Board of Trustees
Chair, University Board of Trustees
HLC Approval Date (if applicable)
3
1.0 NEED
1.1
Why does our region/nation/world need students educated via the proposed program – now and for the
foreseeable future? Clarify the type of student population(s) (traditional age vs. non-traditional/adult,
resident/commuter vs. online, etc.) to which the program is targeted.
(enter response here)
1.2
What is the relationship between SLU’s Catholic, Jesuit educational heritage and mission and the proposed
program? In what ways does this program distinguish SLU among institutions benchmarked for excellence
in the academic field?
(enter response here)
1.3
Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics classifies occupations according to its Standard Occupational
Classification (SOC) codes. Using information found at the links below, provide up to three SOC codes via
which the proposed academic program could be classified (if more than three are needed, contact the
GAAC chair). These codes facilitate the market analysis for prospective students (see 2.4 below) and aid in
evaluation of program outcomes related to student employment in fields/careers associated with the
proposed program. If you have any questions about SOC codes, or need help in determining the most
appropriate SOC codes for the proposed program, please contact the Office of Institutional Research at x2223
or oir@slu.edu .
SOC codes by category/number: http://www.bls.gov/soc/soc_structure_2010.pdf
SOC codes by alpha: http://www.bls.gov/soc/2010/soc_alph.htm
SOC Codes for proposed program:
1)
2)
3)
1.4
Solicit from SLU’s Office of Institutional Research a formal SLU market analysis and attach a copy of the
report to this proposal. Inform them of any pre-established corporate or other populations for which the
program is designed. Please allow the OIR office at least three weeks to conduct analysis and prepare their
report.
Note: Typically, this report will detail available student demand/interest data; national and target-market
specific employment data for graduates (based on SOC codes provided above); similar programs offered by
University-wide and program-specific benchmark institutions; comparative benchmark enrollment data; and
an enrollment outlook summary informed by the market analysis and input from the Office of Admission.
1.5
Address all potential points of curricular overlap/duplication/competition that adoption of this proposal
might produce here at SLU, and explain why such overlap/duplication/competition should not preclude
proposal approval. Solicit and attach statements (of either support or concern) from all department chairs
and/or deans of programs potentially impacted.
(enter response here)
4
1.6
Detail if and how this program impacts and meets the needs of the Madrid Campus students, including
those who complete their degree requirements in Madrid and those who complete their requirements in St.
Louis. Address course sequencing, course articulation with Madrid campus curricula, etc.
(enter response here)
1.7
Detail how this program intentionally facilitates study abroad in Madrid and at other SLU-approved
locations for students otherwise enrolled at the St. Louis campus.
(enter response here)
2.0 PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
2.1
Detail any specific admission requirements that differ from those already in place in the
college/school/center in which the proposed program will be offered.
(enter response here)
2.2
Confirm that the proposal has been reviewed by the University Registrar and that related issues and
concerns (e.g. system configuration, curriculum requirements, course availability/available seats, course
sequencing, pre-requisites, classroom availability, etc.) have been satisfactorily addressed.
(enter response here)
2.3
Detail any mentoring needs/requirements that differ from those for other programs in the
college/school/center in which the proposed program will be offered. Confirm that the proposal has been
reviewed by the appropriate college/school mentoring coordinator or committee and that mentoringrelated issues and concerns have been satisfactorily addressed.
(enter response here)
2.4
Detail the administrative structure for the program, indicating if any additional staffing will be required
within five years. Consider support functions, internship/clinical experience placement and coordination,
etc.
(enter response here)
2.5
Does this proposal necessitate and include the creation (either immediately or within five years) of a new
academic department, or significant modification of an existing one(s)? If so, explain.
(enter response here)
3.0 PEDAGOGY / CURRICULUM / ACADEMIC REQUIREMENTS
3.1
Describe the educational delivery method(s) of the program (e.g., face-to-face, distance/web, hybrid) and
5
the pedagogical rationale for that method(s) in light of the student population(s) you intend to serve.
(enter response here)
3.2
Use the table in Appendix A to detail all course requirements for the program.
3.3
Use the Table in Appendix B to describe all non-course program requirements (e.g., residency
requirements, proficiency requirements, information literacy requirements, portfolio requirements,
examination requirements, entering/continuing/graduating GPA requirements, etc.).
3.4
Describe the curricular logic driving the selection and timing of courses and other requirements. Are these
various curricular elements intentionally taught and sequenced to complement and augment each other? If
so, explain how and why.
(enter response here)
3.5
How do the curriculum and program structure compare with that of similar programs offered by competitor
and/or benchmark institutions? Explain the rationale for either similarity or distinctiveness.
(enter response here)
3.6
The U.S. Department of Education’s “Classification of Instructional Programs” is a taxonomic scheme that
supports the tracking and reporting of academic fields of study and enrollment in/completion of all
programs. Accordingly, all SLU academic programs must be assigned a CIP code. Please utilize the “CIP
Selector” located on the following webpage to select the appropriate six-digit CIP code and description for
the proposed program:
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/cipcode/Default.aspx?y=55 . Enter that code and
description below (e.g. 52.0305 Accounting and Business/Management)
(enter response here)
If you have any questions about CIP codes, or need help in determining the most appropriate CIP code for the
proposed program, please contact the Office of Institutional Research at x2223 or oir@slu.edu .
6
4.0 STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES AND ASSESSMENT PLAN
Note: You are strongly encouraged to work with the University Assessment Coordinator (977-4189 or thatcherk@slu.edu) as you develop this portion of the proposal.
The University Assessment Coordinator can help you establish appropriate student learning outcomes, methods for measuring student progress and using the
data to inform program improvement, and assist with all facets of academic assessment.
4.1
Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan
Complete the table below to provide an overview of your plan to assess student progress toward achievement of desired program-level learning
outcomes. Note that results of evaluations of student performance against each learning outcome identified below will be reviewed as part of all
college/school/center-level and University-level program reviews.
Program-Level Student Learning Outcomes
Evaluation Method
Use of Assessment Data
What are the most important (no more than five)
specific learning outcomes you intend for all
program completers to be able to achieve and
demonstrate upon completion of the program?
How will students document/demonstrate their performance toward
achievement of the learning outcomes? How will you measure student
performance toward achievement of the learning outcomes?
How and when will student performance data be analyzed and then
used to “close the assessment loop” and inform program
improvement? How will you document that?
Describe any use of direct measures: capstone experiences/courses,
standardized exams, comprehensive exams, dissertations, licensure
exams, locally developed exams, portfolio reviews, course-embedded
assessments, etc.
Describe any use of indirect measures: student, alumni or employer
surveys (including satisfaction surveys); exit interviews/focus groups with
grads; retention/transfer studies; graduation rates; job placement/grad
school admission rates; etc.
EXAMPLE:
EXAMPLE:
EXAMPLE:
1. Demonstrate a thorough understanding of
ethical problems being addressed in an
individual case or class of cases.
Direct Measures:
Assessment results will be analyzed annually against a standard
rubric by the program director and a small team of faculty;
recommendations for curriculum, pedagogy and/or assessment
revisions will be made to the department faculty on an annual cycle
that allows for appropriate implementation.
1. The following courses in the program specifically require formal case
analyses designed to elicit direct evidence of student development
toward this outcome: BUS 500, BUS 522, BUS 600
2. Embedded in the mid-term and final exams in certain required
courses (BUS 550, MGMT 503, BUS 650) will be questions designed
specifically to provide data enabling faculty and program
administrators to evaluate student progress toward this outcome.
Reviews of the impact of any such program changes will also be
conducted annually, and the records of those reviews will be
maintained by our department assessment coordinator.
Indirect Measures
1.
End-of-course student surveys will solicit self-evaluations of their
development in the context of this outcome.
2. Alumni surveys (administered one and five post-graduation) will
solicit from graduates self-evaluations of their continued
development in the context of this outcome, and will particularly
focus on how the program has impacted professional competency.
5/1/12
7
1.
Direct Measures:
Indirect Measures:
2.
Direct Measures:
Indirect Measures:
3.
Direct Measures:
Indirect Measures:
4.
Direct Measures:
Indirect Measures:
5.
Direct Measures:
Indirect Measures:
4.2
Curriculum Mapping
Courses should contribute to student achievement of the program learning outcomes detailed above. Sequencing should be intentional and
complementary, allowing for the development of curricular content at multiple levels and the application and demonstration of student understanding
and skills at multiple levels. Accordingly, complete the two curriculum maps below, indicating the course(s) in which each learning outcome is
intentionally addressed and at particular levels of intellectual complexity and rigor, using the level indicators* provided below. Depending on the
nature of the proposed program, the levels may seem more or less appropriate. Without veering from the spirit of the exercise, you may adapt the
levels as deemed appropriate.
5/1/12
8
Level I
Level II
Level III
 Knowledge & Comprehension: Recall data or
information; understand the meaning,
translation, interpolations, and interpretation
of instructions and problems; state a problem
in one’s own words.
 Application: Use a concept in new situations;
unprompted use of an abstraction.
Application of knowledge in novel situations.
 Analysis: Separates material or concepts into
component parts so organizational structure
may be understood. Distinguishes facts from
inferences.
 Synthesis: Builds a structure or pattern from
diverse elements. Put parts together to form
a whole, with emphasis on creating a new
meaning or structure.
 Evaluation: Make judgments about the value
of ideas or materials.
Note: When you first complete the curriculum maps, you may see that certain outcomes are not addressed in any developmentally-appropriate sequence, or
that a particular outcome might not be addressed substantially enough; you might even see that you have included a course(s) in your curriculum that
doesn’t substantially contribute to the development of any outcome. You should use the map to alter your program design, course syllabi and course
sequencing to best facilitate and support student achievement of the outcomes. The result of that exercise should be a final curriculum map presented below
when you submit your proposal to UAAC.
Courses Offered by Home Department of Proposed Major or Minor:
Major or Minor
Student Learning Outcomes
Example: Outcome #1
DEPT 501
DEPT 502
DEPT 503
DEPT 504
DEPT 505
DEPT 506
1
1
1, 2
2
2
2
DEPT 507
DEPT 508
DEPT 509
DEPT 510
DEPT 511
3
3
2
2, 3
Program Courses Offered by Other Departments:
Major or Minor
Student Learning Outcomes
Example: Outcome #1
DEPT 400
DEPT 410
DEPT 420
1
2
1
DEPT 430
DEPT 440
DEPT 450
DEPT 460
2, 3
* Adapted from Bloom’s Taxonomy (1965)
5/1/12
9
5.0 ADDITIONAL GOALS AND ASSESSMENT PLAN
5.1
Detail any additional program goals (other than learning outcomes) – e.g., student retention and graduation
rates, program rankings, faculty productivity, etc. — and specific annual performance targets. Additionally,
summarize assessment methods for measuring progress. Performance toward each target noted will be
evaluated as part of all program reviews.
(enter response here)
6.0 ACCREDITATION
6.1
Is there some form of regional, national or international disciplinary/specialized accreditation available for the
proposed program? If so, what is the name of the accreditor/accrediting agency? Do you plan to seek this
accreditation? Detail the benefits and drawbacks of both a) being accredited and b) not being accredited by
the aforementioned agency. Does accreditation “make or break” SLU’s successful offering of this program?
Explain why or why not.
(enter response here)
7.0 University Resources
7.1
Does the curriculum of the proposed program require student enrollment in courses or other academic
resources from departments other than the department(s) offering this proposal? If so, document support
from all affected departments, and confirmation that resolutions to any related concerns have been
reached (and how).
(enter response here)
7.2
Summarize the library resources needed for the successful conduct of this program. Solicit from the
Assistant Vice President for University Libraries a formal review of available and needed resources
(complete with cost estimates), and attach a copy of her/his report. Please allow the Library staff at least
three weeks to conduct analysis and prepare their report.
(enter response here)
7.3
Describe any information technology resources needed for the successful conduct of this program (special
software, hardware, related equipment, special IT support, etc.). Solicit from the Office of the Vice
President for Information Technology a formal review of available and needed resources (complete with
cost estimates), and attach a copy of her/his report. Please allow the IT staff at least three weeks to conduct
analysis and prepare their report.
(enter response here)
7.4
Describe any additional equipment, facilities or other University resources needed for the conduct of this
program in the first five years of operation, including cost estimates.
(enter response here)
5/1/12
10
8.0 BUSINESS PLAN
8.1
In the table below, record student enrollment projections in each category for the first five years.
Enrollment Categories
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
FTE* of first-time, first-year students new to SLU who would
not have come to SLU without this program
Breakout of full-time students only
Breakout of part-time students only
FTE* of first-time, first-year students new to SLU who would’ve
likely come to SLU anyway, but will now choose this program
Breakout of full-time students only
Breakout of part-time students only
FTE* of transfer students new to SLU
Breakout of full-time students only
Breakout of part-time students only
FTE* of current SLU students who transfer into the proposed
program
FTE* of Continuing/Retained Students Each Year
Total FTE* for each year
* FTE is “Full-Time Equivalent”, calculated as the number of all full-time students plus 1/3 of all part-time students
8.2
Describe the internal and external marketing and recruitment plans designed to garner the projected
enrollments.
(enter response here)
8.3
In light of projected enrollment, list any additional faculty and administrative staff needed within the next five
years beyond those currently employed at SLU (either in the department offering this proposal or in another
SLU department). If a specific academic rank is required at the point of hire, please note it.
Additional Faculty and/or Staff Needed
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Additional tenure-track faculty (FTE)
Additional non-tenure-track faculty (FTE)
Additional adjunct faculty (FTE)
Additional administrative staff (FTE)
8.4
Discuss the rationales for any needed positions identified in the table above.
(enter response here)
8.5
If this proposal is approved and the program enacted, will any other courses or programs be discontinued, or
be offered less frequently?
(enter response here)
5/1/12
11
Appendix A: Curriculum – Course Requirements & Sequencing
Year
Example
Spring
Fall
ENGL 501: Teaching Writing (3)
ENGL 502: Teaching Writing II (3)
ENGL 511: Literacy Theory (3)
ENGL 512: Literacy Theory II (3)
ENGL 604: Rhetoric Theory (3)
ENGL 605: Rhetoric Theory II (3)
th
ENGL 635: 17 Century Literature (3)
Term Credit Total: 12 s.h.
First
Second
Third
Fourth
Fifth?
Total Major/Minor Credits Required:
Total Core Credits Required:
Total Elective Credits Required:
th
ENGL 636: 18 Century Literature (3)
Term Credit Total: 12 s.h.
Summer (if applicable)
Total Annual
Credits Earned
n/a
24 s.h.
Appendix B: Curriculum -- Non-Course Requirements
Requirement
Explanation & Rationale